Forum:Movie crew list formatting
Hey, guys. As you all know, I've been constantly updating the crew list for 's . However, I would like to have some consensus on the format we should use not only for that movie's crew list, but for the crew lists on all the movie pages. I would like to have some consistency in each of the articles. Having said that, I think the best way to format the lists is one of the following: # have the list match the credits of the film; or # have the crew members separated by their department A list following choice #2 will be better organized than choice #1 and will allow readers to more easily find a specific crew member. If we go with choice #2, I would recommending starting the list with the "big three" departments, i.e. those departments headed by those who have the greatest control over the picture. These three are: :;Directing: includes directors, assistant directors, second unit directors, and DGA trainees :;Producing: includes producers, executive producers, co-executive producers, associate producers, co-producers, supervising producers and line producers :;Writers: includes screenwriters, story writers, additional dialogue writers, concept writers, and Gene Roddenberry (credited as Star Trek creator) After that, the departments should be listed in alphabetical order as follows: :;Art direction: includes production designers, art directors, assistant art directors, art department coordinators, set designers, production illustrators, and graphic designers :;Camera and lighting: includes director of photography (or cinematographer), camera operators, assistant cameras, still photographers, camera loaders, additional photographers, lighting technicians, electricians, motion control technicians and operators, digital imaging technicians, best boys, gaffers, riggers and grips :;Casting: includes casting directors, assistant and associate casting directors, extras casting, and (non-ADR) voice casting :;Costuming: includes costume designers, costume supervisors, costumers, cutters & fitters, costume illustrators, tailors, and seamstresses :;Film editing: includes film editors, associate editors, assistant editors, negative cutters, and colorists :;Location and transportation: includes location managers, assistant location managers, location scouts, transportation coordinators, transportation captains, transportation officer coordinators, drivers, pilots, and vehicle workers :;Make-up: includes make-up artists, hair stylists, hairdressers, make-up and hair department heads, and make-up effects artists :;Music: includes composers, additional composers, music supervisors, music executives, music editors, music recordists, recording consultants, orchestrators, conductors, instrument players, music engineers, and music playback :;Post-production services: includes post-production supervisors, coordinators, and executives, projectionists, and title designers (this could probably be merged with editing) :;Production management: includes production managers, unit production managers and second unit production managers :;Production services: includes production assistants, craft service, caterers, acting coaches, script supervisors, consultants, researchers, choreographers, production coordinators, unit publicists, medics, accountants, teachers, production secretaries, runners, and personal assistants (i.e. assistant to Rick Berman; assistant to J.J. Abrams) :;Set decoration and construction: includes set decorators, prop masters, assistant prop masters, armourers, set dressers, production buyers, lead persons, scenic artists, construction coordinators, construction foremen (including paint, plastering, labor, and drapery), carpenters, signs, painters, greens people, and construction auditors :;Sound: includes sound editors, sound effects editors, sound mixers, re-recording mixers, boom operators, utility sound technicians, cable persons, sound recordists, rerecordists, ADR supervisors, ADR editors, ADR voice casting, foley editors, foley artists, assistant sound editors, foley recordists, and digital assistants :;Special effects: includes special effects coordinators, supervisors, technicians, etc. :;Stand-ins: includes stand-ins and photo doubles (could probably be included with production services or be merged with stunts) :;Stunts: includes stunt coordinators, assistant stunt coordinators, stunt performers, stunt doubles, and stunt rigging (this list could probably come right after the cast) :;Visual effects: includes visual effects supervisors and producers, compositors, modelers, matte painters, previsualization artists, visualization artists, digital and visual effects artists, etc. As noted in the list, some of those can probably be merged with other listings, but for the most part, that's how the departments should be separated. So, what do you guys think? Let's hear it -- thoughts, comments, complaints, compliments, cries for mercy... I want them all! Have at it! :) --From Andoria with Love 21:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC) :OK, I like the list by department and think it should look like that on the articles. This list will offer a better order, if you want to find a make-up artist for example. If we choose the list match the credits of the film, we'll have different lists on the movie articles, because the screen lists change from film to film. Perhaps we could merge production services and production management, I think in the latter one are not many people. Please don't merge stand-ins and stunt performers. These two categories are completely different. I would also prefer the stunt performer section placed right behind the cast list, because the stunt performers are (beside the actors) the only people who appear on screen. Perhaps a subsection for the cast list (uncredited) would be good, or maybe for every department, so we have to type the word one time instead behind every third name. My thoughts. :) – Tom 22:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC) ::As I stated before... by the credits order on film. Same as for the various television series. -- Sulfur 22:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC) Well, the TV shows are a slightly different. There aren't as many people working or credited on the shows so the departments aren't quite as varied. If that makes sense... --From Andoria with Love 22:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC) Does no one else have an opinion on this? --From Andoria with Love 09:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC) ::Doesn't matter. Credit order is credit order. Point being, we should respect it, despite the article. Until them credits are seen, doesn't matter how we sort 'em. After them credits are actually available... we convert to that order. Makes it easier for verification too. -- Sulfur 11:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC) So you're saying you would agree with the separate department order for the new Star Trek and any other future movies until the credits are known? --From Andoria with Love 16:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC) ::As I said in the prior discussion on this... once the proper credit listing is available, we use that. Until then, we sort them however works. By department works just fine for me. :) -- Sulfur 16:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)